been to them all in the list except texas (only both texas's, florida's and new yorks to see and been to them all). The list is not bad. Pittsburgh is by far the best ballpark i have stepped into. nothing even comes close to it.

Can you give more detail to those of us who have not been??? I have been to Pitt several times but before the stadium. I assume it is in the downtown area.

I've been to 13 stadiums. Pittsburgh was easily the best park I've been to. The one stadium I was disappointed in was Jacobs Field in Cleveland. That one opened after the Cell and numerous people said it was a much better park than the Cell. There's absolutely no way I would take the Cleveland park over the Cell. The only advantage it has over the Cell is that it's in Downtown Cleveland. The Cell is not in downtown Chicago/South Loop where it should of been built. If the Cell had been built in the South Loop. the whole perception of the Cell and White Sox franchise would be different today.

If the Cell had been built in the South Loop. the whole perception of the Cell and White Sox franchise would be different today.

The Cell should have merely been oriented to face downtown. Here you have one of, if not the, most iconic skylines in the world and you'd never know it sitting behind homeplate. If you had the skyline beyond the outfield walls that alone would probably enhance the perception of the Cell to an incredible extent.

The Cell should have merely been oriented to face downtown. Here you have one of, if not the, most iconic skylines in the world and you'd never know it sitting behind homeplate. If you had the skyline beyond the outfield walls that alone would probably enhance the perception of the Cell to an incredible extent.

I had heard that was the initial idea but the architects could not adjust for the wind currents off the lake if it had been done.

__________________"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)

"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." ó George Orwell

I had heard that was the initial idea but the architects could not adjust for the wind currents off the lake if it had been done.

That could have been a consideration. I have heard the ballpark doesn't face the skyline because home plate, which determines the address, was to be kept at 35th and Shields. The White Sox attract so much negative attention from the media and even fans who dislike the ownership that prejudices may go farther in determining which reason you believe.

Still, the unobstructed skyline I've seen from a ramp looking north isn't really a big deal. The Cell is too far south to get the dramatic skyline people insist it should have. It certainly wouldn't be the big deal that would make people rave about what an awesome place it is to watch a game.

AT&T was supposed to be built facing the as iconic and more in-your-face San Francisco skyline, although the park sits near the Bay Bridge, nowhere near the Golden Gate Bridge. Giants ownership raised money to build the park selling bonds with the skyline as a selling point. As I understand it, the ballpark was situated to play out toward the Bay because the wind currents made the location unplayable facing the city. That has worked out, with splash home runs and such. But perhaps it says something for views of what lies beyond the outfield fences when you consider that a park near the top of most best lists doesn't have a view of the iconic skyline outside, but rather, if you look closely on a clear day from the steep upper level seats, what many would consider baseball's worst ballpark.

That could have been a consideration. I have heard the ballpark doesn't face the skyline because home plate, which determines the address, was to be kept at 35th and Shields. The White Sox attract so much negative attention from the media and even fans who dislike the ownership that prejudices may go farther in determining which reason you believe.

Still, the unobstructed skyline I've seen from a ramp looking north isn't really a big deal. The Cell is too far south to get the dramatic skyline people insist it should have. It certainly wouldn't be the big deal that would make people rave about what an awesome place it is to watch a game.

AT&T was supposed to be built facing the as iconic and more in-your-face San Francisco skyline, although the park sits near the Bay Bridge, nowhere near the Golden Gate Bridge. Giants ownership raised money to build the park selling bonds with the skyline as a selling point. As I understand it, the ballpark was situated to play out toward the Bay because the wind currents made the location unplayable facing the city. That has worked out, with splash home runs and such. But perhaps it says something for views of what lies beyond the outfield fences when you consider that a park near the top of most best lists doesn't have a view of the iconic skyline outside, but rather, if you look closely on a clear day from the steep upper level seats, what many would consider baseball's worst ballpark.

Because of the sun, I thought all ballparks have to be oriented either NE or SE, although looking at google maps AT&T Park appears to be oriented due east. Old Comiskey was of course NE and USCF is SE. To face the San Francisco skyline, wouldn't AT&T Park have to face NW? I suppose it could have faced NE and the view would have been just a different part of the bay and the East Bay, as well as maybe the Bay Bridge, too.

As for USCF, I have heard that address line before, and I don't understand why that would be the case. I also remember reading (most likely here) that the team wanted the main entrance on 35th. But quite a few of the newer parks have a grand entrance as a CF plaza (Nats Park and Turner Field come to mind) as opposed to the more traditional homeplate entrance.

Because of the sun, I thought all ballparks have to be oriented either NE or SE, although looking at google maps AT&T Park appears to be oriented due east. Old Comiskey was of course NE and USCF is SE. To face the San Francisco skyline, wouldn't AT&T Park have to face NW? I suppose it could have faced NE and the view would have been just a different part of the bay and the East Bay, as well as maybe the Bay Bridge, too.
...

As I understand it, AT&T was re-oriented from what was originally intended to make best use of the site for baseball. The architects, I have been told, had to come up with a plan B, maybe a plan C. Maybe they traded "splash home runs" for skyline or bridge views. I don't know when in the design they left out bullpens. I wasn't living in California at the time. I think what the ballpark proves, though, it that the view of what is outside the park is irrelevant if you have a great park.

This is my ballparks visited list- of the current ones- I like the Giants the best- great ballpark, smart and friendly fans, incredible setting.

PNC is #2.

If you ever want see a park that has the arches from old Comiskey- visit Ballpark of Arlington- you can see teh arches around the infield like Old Comiskey.

I like almost all the new ones- the right field part of Camden Yards, the left field bleachers in Cleveland, the huge Tigers outside of Comerica, etc. Rogers Centre is a hole.

Quad City or Traverse City- my favorite minor league parks.

That is a good list. Quad Cities is nice. Didn't think Rogers Centre was bad but I was there the year it opened. You have to get to Fort Wayne Tincaps and South Bend Silverhawks (they remodeled and it great). I have been to most of the those too (been to a total of 97 parks-minors and majors - former and current).

As for USCF, I have heard that address line before, and I don't understand why that would be the case. I also remember reading (most likely here) that the team wanted the main entrance on 35th. But quite a few of the newer parks have a grand entrance as a CF plaza (Nats Park and Turner Field come to mind) as opposed to the more traditional homeplate entrance.

According to the White Sox Encyclopedia by Rich Lindberg, both the wind patterns and having a 35th st. address played into their decision process for where the park faces. The main reason was the wind patterns though. The Sox wanted to build a more HR friendly ballpark than Old Comiskey (where HRs went to die) and had weather analysis done and determined that facing SE would give them the best hitting conditions. While the ballpark played a bit smaller than Old Comiskey when it first opened in 1991, it was still more of a pitcher's park than a hitter's haven. It wasn't until the walls were brought in a bit in 2001 and the upper deck was reconfigured with the shorter roof height in 2004 that the ballpark became more HR friendly especially in the warmer weather.

__________________
The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin